1. Hi Brian
    This fascinates me. It is a great example of how rights are currently being used, as opposed to what the theory is.
    A couple of questions:
    Did you paint the artwork? (I’m guessing not, but you are a pretty multi-talented guy, so nothing would surprise me.) If not, was publishing images of it mentioned in the conditions of sale. Sometimes you can end up purchasing the right to display a work, but not the right to publish images of it.
    Maybe the ABC knew this and were using your work as an example… (again, I’m guessing not). 🙂
    Did you ask the ABC for permission to publish their Web page (including logo). Again, I’m guessing not.
    The gap between what people know about IP and copyright, what they do, what they are expected to do and what the law actually says is just getting wider and wider. The web is getting more and more tangled as we weave.
    Anyway, I like the work and I like this example.
    See you when you are next in Melbourne.

  2. Yes all of what you have said is true and I totally concur and posted knowing this. At the moment, I’d think that neither the ABC or my publishing are for monetary gain. I have put a few art works up and usually have included a link back to the artist so that for them it counts as free advertising. In the cases where I have been in contact with the artist they have been happy with this. As this was an earlier posting, I was not so knowledgeable, I did not put up the artists details. I will correct it in this case and include the artists details. Hopefully he will get some sales out of it. I did meet him when I purchased the painting.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *